Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the Planning Commission meeting for May 26th, 2026. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you very much. City Clerk, may we please have the roll call?

Commissioner Rao?

Here.

Commissioner Linskog? Here. Commissioner Fung? Vice Chair Scharf? Here. Chair Kasolchon? Present. For the record, Commissioner Fung is absent. Before we proceed, Chair, Vice Chairs, Commissioners, and members of the public, as a reminder, Commissioner Lindskog is participating remotely this evening. We have not heard from any members of the public that they plan to participate in tonight's meeting from Commissioner Lindskog's remote location. Commissioner Lindskog, are you located at C-174, Anad Vihar, Delhi, Delhi, 110092, India?

Yes.

Can you confirm that you posted the agenda at your location?

Yes, I did.

Are there any individuals over the age of 18 with you? And has anyone indicated to you that they intend to make public comment or address the commission?

Nope.

As a reminder, we will be having a 15 minute time limit for questions and deliberations. I'll rely on you to notify me if any members of the public wish to speak from your location. Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, so now we'll move to the approval of minutes. Do we have a motion to approve the May 12th, 2026 Planning Commission minutes?

So moved. Second.

May we have a vote, please? Commissioner Rao?

Aye.

Commissioner Linskog? Yes. Commissioner Fung is absent. Vice Chair Scharf?

Aye.

Chair Kasulshan? Aye. The motion carries with Commissioner Fung absent.

Thank you. So seeing as we have no postponements, we will now move to oral communications. City Clerk, do we have any oral communications?

We have one group in person, Robert George. As a reminder, groups get two minutes per participant, so the time for this will be eight minutes.

Good evening. My name is Robert George. I'm a Cupertino resident and homeowner. I respectfully urge the Planning Commission to recognize the proposed capital improvement project allocating $150,000 to implement a pickleball sound attenuation solution at Cooper Chinoma.

Pardon me, sorry. If this is about the CIP item, then you would want to make a public comment during that agenda item itself. So that would be very soon, in a few minutes. Yes, but this is for items not on the agenda.

Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any other comments?

We have no speakers in person and no hands raised on zoom chair.

Thank you very much. So we have no old business, we'll move on to new business. This agenda item number two is to discuss capital improvement programs for 2026 to 2027 and just to clarify for all the difference between this and the prior CIP item is that this item is to provide input on the proposed capital improvement plan as opposed to just some conformance with general plan. And before I begin, I did want to just briefly note that we are experimenting in the planning commission with time limits of 15 minutes for question and answer for each commissioner. And this is just to make sure that we make the most effective use of the time here and that everyone has a positive experience. And as this is something new that has not really been done before on a commission, we will adjust accordingly and commissioners do have the right to yield time to others if they so choose. Thank you and so now do we have a staff report?

Yes, good evening Planning Commission. This item is presented from city staff from the Public Works Division Department and as a result I have here with us today Chad Mosley and Susan Michael who's online on Zoom to present this item.

good evening commission chad mosley director of public works thank you for having us tonight we are here to speak about our fy 2627 capital improvement program including the five-year plan virtually i have susan michael here who is our capital improvement program manager she'll be presenting from home but she'll be here to answer questions and with that stated i'll hand off the presentation to her until she throws it back at me thank you director

Everybody can hear me and see my screen.

Yes, we can.

So tonight's action. Thank you, commissioners and members of the public. Tonight's action is to receive the presentation and provide input on the development of the proposed capital improvement programs fiscal year 2026 through 2027 and five year plan as related to the city's general plan. In short, this doesn't require a vote. We'll review the CIP and the fiscal year 26-27 proposal and answer any questions that you may have. If you wish to provide support on the projects informally or formally with a vote, you can do this, but it is not required. Wanted to start with a list of the current CIP projects. In short, there are 24 current projects five in the facilities category, four in parks and rec, the green, five in streets and infrastructure, the orange, eight in the transportation division, and two sustainability projects. And they're all color-coded, you can see there. So the proposed plan for this year and the five-year plan. So this table shows the CIP, Project request for fiscal year 2627, we are requesting an additional. We are requesting additional funding for the 1st, 2 projects. And the remaining 5 are new projects, and I'll go into a little bit more detail here in those. So, the 1st project is additional funding for the facilities condition assessment, which we abbreviate. Facilities condition assessment project for an additional 1.25Million. This will fund the remainder of the priority 1 projects that were. Listed in the 2018 and 2022 facility condition assessment reports. except for one project remains, which is the library fire alarm system, which will be proposed with next year's CIP proposal. These projects are identified as critical maintenance for our facilities and are most impactful to health and safety, as well as fiscal responsibility to save money on utilities and repairs. The next project is we're asking to fund additional funding for the city hall annex project. When CIP came to council with the fiscal year 2526 proposal last year, council gave clear direction to resume work on this project. And at that time we let council know that we expected the project to cost approximately $8 million. We're requesting 5 million now to bring the funding up to the $8 million. So that these costs will be included in the fiscal year 2627 budget. This is a highly prioritized project as it provides. An interim workplace solution during the city hall construction. As well, as providing a purpose built location for the emergency operation center. The next project is a new project. It's the Blackberry farms golf course pro shop. If you visited there, you'll see it's obviously in need of an upgrade. There's a great deal of foot traffic at this location and the pro shop is the hub for the revenue generated at the facility. It needs electrical and accessibility improvements in addition to the facelift. The blush property project proposes to demolish the existing residential building Replace it with minimal grading, natural habitat, planting and modest pathways. This was added after the was proposed at the end of March. It was added at the 2nd. Meeting in March, when we went to council and they requested that we, um. Start work on this project, so we're in the process of getting a budget and scope developed and then we'll go back to council and we have that information. sound attenuation at the memorial park pickleball courts the pickleball community and the nearby residents have requested that public works move forward with sound attenuation improvements at the memorial park pickleball courts pickle public works is evaluating options preliminary review indicates that sound panels and a new structurally improved fence will be required to hold those panels The next project is the Sports Center Courts Resurfacing. The courts were resurfaced 10 years ago and it's supposed to happen every six to eight years. Doing this project lessens risk and liability and provides a safer, more enjoyable playing arena for the community. It became a CIP project because it requires some engineering. And the last project is the Stevens Creek Boulevard 85 North bound ramp intersection. The West port developer initiated multi modal improvements at this intersection as part of their project. After working with Caltrans for ages, the development project finished before Caltrans gave approval. The developer provided in lieu fees for the city to complete the work. This funding is in place and we're seeking, we're looking for council approval to move forward with the project. And the five-year plan. So, the 5 year plan has the 1st column. Includes the funding for this fiscal year proposal that we're asking for. And the 2nd year includes the library. Fire alarm system as part of the FCA project, that's the 1.3Million at the top. And we will also resume hopefully to resume funding for the accessibility. And outfalls repairs that are usually annually funded. And a year 3 includes repairs to the irrigation of the blackberry farm. Golf course that council approved in fiscal year. 23, or we, we chose the option over other options at that time. And in years 4 and 5, we hope to do some work on park shade. Structures and continuing the ADA and outfalls repairs. Each year our stated budget is. Is meant to be 2M dollars and so. Typically, we try to stay within that budget realm. And in this year, we're using capital reserve funds to. Meet the budget requirements. And this is the same slide, except. We've inserted the city hall improvements as the 1st line to show. The impact there. This table, the funding for the City Hall project will come from the Future Use Fund, which was the outcome of the CDTFA settlement. And while it's still part of the general fund, it is a separate line item in the budget. And for this reason, we've kept the City Hall project accounting as a separate line item. And that's the presentation. And we're available for any questions you might have.

Thank you very much, Susan. It's great to see some of the changes since the last presentation. I'll bring it back to the commission now for any clarifying questions. Commissioner Rao.

Okay, starting my timer here. Director Mosley and Ms. Michael, thank you for the presentation. If you can project the proposed five-year plan, the last slide, the one before. So I see that you're showing years two to five as a spend on some of these items, but not for the remaining. How should we interpret that? I'M NOT, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. THE SLIDE THAT SAYS PROPOSED CIP FIVE-YEAR PLAN. YES. THE FUNDING FOR FY26, 27 IS LISTED, BUT THERE ARE ALSO SOME OTHER PROJECTS THAT SHOW YEAR 2 TO 5 WITH THE AMOUNT. SO THE PROJECTS THAT ARE LISTED SHOULD THEY ALSO HAVE YEAR 2 TO 5 THAT ARE BLANK CURRENTLY?

These are the years we're requesting the funds, so we're requesting those funds for FY 26-27. Our goal is to try and finish these projects, if possible, within that year. Oftentimes, those funds are carried over. We haven't broken it down into how much we think we'll be spending any particular year for any particular project.

But it's fair to assume the items like the resurfacing of courts and the sound activation is a one-off spend, I would think. Is that fair? Yes. So we wouldn't expect to see this come back next year again for more? Correct. We don't think. Okay. All right. Thank you. Reserving my time.

Any other questions from Commission? I HAVE ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION. ON THE CITYWIDE FACILITIES CONDITION ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION, HOW ARE THOSE PROJECTS SELECTED? BECAUSE I DID TAKE A LOOK THROUGH THE 2022 DOCUMENT AND THERE ARE A LOT ON THAT LIST. SO HOW DOES IT GET SELECTED? AND I THINK IT FLASHED UP SO BRIEFLY I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO READ EVERYTHING THAT WAS ON IT.

And I can try and answer that and Susan can add more information or interrupt me as appropriate. But we do have some facility condition assessment reports that have been prepared over the last six or so years. In those reports, they've gone through, looked at all of our facilities and indicated what items need to be upgraded because they've either passed their useful life or they're just in dire need of an upgrade. they reviewed that list of items and stuff that was life safety or that had a return on investments. We focus those as the high priorities. And so we've been trying to work on those high priorities facility conditions over the last few years. And we're getting close to finishing the top tier.

Okay. Understood. So it's, it's really about prioritizing things that are impacting safety first. Correct. Thank you. Any other questions from commission? Okay, then I will proceed and I will ask another question. On the Blesch House, I wanted to clarify, will there be any removal of native trees?

We will try not to remove any trees on site, especially any of the large trees that are adjacent to the creek. We consider those riparian trees, so we'll try and work around those to the maximum extent possible. I don't foresee there being a need for any trees coming out, except potentially through an assessment that says the tree is potentially unsafe.

Okay, excellent. And then I had another question on the pickleball attenuation. How are we accounting for the two-story homes that are in that area if they are above the fencing?

Yeah, based on my assessments for those houses immediately to the north, I think there's one house that has a two-story window on it. That window doesn't face directly towards the courts. But with respect to the sound attenuation, we're looking to put Sound panels on the existing fence that existing fence is about 12 feet there may be That should block most of the sound from the courts But there may be some of those courts in the south side that may still have a direct line of sight That'll be something that's assessed with the note with the the noise assessment that we'll be doing With sound it does the decibel levels do go down with distance So they are a little further away, which will be helpful, but that'll be part of the assessment

Okay, thank you. And then my final question on Pickleball would be, are there any concerns about sound reflection towards the west side neighbors, since it's only a one-sided wall on the north side, I believe?

That will be assessed with the sound analysis to see what, if anything, needs to be done on that side.

All right, thank you. Vice Chair?

Yeah, I had a question about the City Hall retrofit. So I was looking at a document from 2024 that says the complete seismic retrofit and rehabilitation of the interior would be $27.5 million. And now I'm seeing it's almost $51 million two years later. So what happened?

I'll have Susan explain that. She's better at explaining that than I am. Great.

So thank you for your question, Commissioner. The costs that were done in, was it 2023, you said?

No, 2024, with $27.5 million for the complete renovation and then like $40-something million for a teardown rebuild.

Right. So, there is a couple of factors, and if you want to see more detail, you can look at the council. Presentation that we did in, I think it was December 16th, 2025. About this project, and in short, we. When we did the 2024 price, we basically took previous cost estimates that we had gotten done professionally. And escalated them using escalation factors. But what we realized that we were missing was that. There was a good deal of soft costs that weren't included, like the cost to move people, the furniture. Owners costs what we were talking about previously was construction costs. So now the costs are meant to include everything to be all inclusive to know the true cost to the city. So that was in short. The biggest upgrade to the costs. I'm trying to look at the documents from back then. The main construction costs, if you want to do apples to apples. And I looked at it for 2025. When it was at 31.8Million, so you could see how that progress, but then we added in, we have. hazardous waste abatement, interim workplace rental, other costs. So it just, it adds up really quickly. Legal fees, well, that's really in there. Permitting, permitting was outrageously expensive, believe it or not. So we just, we tried to account for everything.

Yeah, okay, thank you. It just seems like 20 million more just seems like a lot, but I accept what you said.

Commissioner Rowe.

Thank you. On the Blesch property, the funding is TBD, so you're still having it on this list. Do you think you're going to have a line of sight on how much funding you may need by the time it goes to council?

Probably not in time for council. We will evaluate this, come up with a reasonable cost estimate. We'll come back to council afterwards and let them know what we're looking at, and at that point in time, ask them to provide funding for it appropriately.

And you mentioned you're not expecting to remove trees by the creek, which reminded me, is any part of the project on land that has valley water easements, because valley water does manage the creek area, so is this a project that... Not for this property.

There is a little triangular piece of property on the west side of this that's owned by Valley Water, but the rest of this site is all city-owned property, no valley water easements. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions from Commission? Then we will move on to public comment. City Clerk, do we have any public comments?

We have two speakers in person and two hands raised on Zoom. Our first speaker is Robert George. Welcome, Robert.

All right. Thank you.

Now I... Well, I had the one card.

I didn't know somebody had submitted one already for me.

Okay, so. So the second speaker may be the same name.

Okay, so are you guys speaking together as a group? I'm not sure. Okay, perfect. So I'll go ahead and get you started.

All right. All right, again, my name is Robert George. I'm a Cupertino resident and homeowner. We respectfully urge the Planning Commission to recognize the proposed capital improvement allocating $150,000 to implement a pickleball sound attenuation solution at Cupertino Memorial Park. Pickleball has become one of the fastest growing recreational activities in our community. The courts at Memorial Park provide an important space for residents of all ages to exercise, socialize, and build community connections. At the same time, we recognize the concerns raised by nearby residents regarding noise impacts generated by pickleball play. The proposed sound attenuation project represents a balanced, constructive, and forward-looking solution that addresses neighborhood concerns while preserving equitable public access to this valuable recreational amenity. So there are a number of factors involved in this. It demonstrates the city's commitment to being responsive to both residents and park users. It helps reduce sound impact through practical mitigation measures rather than limiting public access. It preserves inclusive community recreation opportunities for seniors, families, youth, and players of all skill levels. It avoids discriminatory or exclusionary measures such as resident restrictions or user pass systems that would undermine the welcoming and community-oriented nature of the park. It is a reasonable infrastructure investment that supports long-term coexistence between recreation and surrounding neighborhoods. Cupertino Memorial Park is a shared public resource that should remain accessible, inclusive, and enjoyable for everyone. Investing in sound attenuation is a collaborative solution that benefits the entire community and reflects Cupertino's values of fairness, wellness, and neighborly cooperation. So we respectfully ask that you support us, the city council, to approve the proposed $150,000 capital investment project and move forward with implementing an effective pickleball sound attenuation solution as soon as possible. Thank you.

Okay, our next speaker is Fred Drinkwaver, followed by Rhoda Frye, followed by Jean Bedourd. Welcome, Fred.

I waive my time.

Okay. Our next speaker is Rhoda Frye, followed by Jean Bedourd. Welcome, Rhoda. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Oh, awesome. Okay. Well, I hope that if you guys do the pickleball noise thing that it will work because pickleballs, it really is for some people, for some park users, particularly for people who are on the spectrum, and we have many of them, the noise is unbearable. I've got four other points I'd like to make. One is, it looks like over at the Blackberry Farm, the picnic ground parking lot, it looks like they're getting ready to plant new trees, which is great because trees died, most of them died quite some time ago. But I'm just wondering, I didn't happen to notice that project on the CIP. likewise already at the golf course and maybe this was a separate project but um just if i could get some clarification um there's already a new bathroom a very renovated bathroom there which is greatly appreciated but i'm just wondering how that fits into the larger piece of things um staying in the neighborhood regarding the blush house I think it's a good idea to remove it. It is sort of moving toward being a public nuisance and an eyesore. But the other thing is I would be concerned about inviting people into that area, particularly from the Blue Pheasant area, as in the past, even over in the beginning of the Orange Orchard area, I've found youth condoms. And I just, given that we have a nightclub operating there, at least out by the city, I'm just concerned about getting more use into the proximity of that facility. And the last one has to do with previous CIP projects. And that is at the sports center. I noticed that the solar panels have gone in, but also that there's these signs on the overhangs that there's low clearance for vehicles. And I was really surprised to see that because I would have thought that they would have been put high enough in for large vehicles that are making deliveries, et cetera. And I'm wondering whether there's any plans to retrofit that so that we don't have those warnings up there. It just seems really, it seems surprising to me because I've seen those solar things at a higher height. So that's it. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Rhoda. Our next speaker is Jean Bedard, followed by David Howe, followed by Hank. Welcome, Jean.

Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Okay. Good evening, planning commissioners. My name is Jean Bedourd, and as you know, I'm a longtime Cupertino resident. I'm speaking tonight on this review of the capital improvement projects for 2026-27. First, I'd like to commend Public Works for their diligence in providing cost-effective solutions for the city. I'm impressed that they were able to save over a million dollars in projected costs. This is prudent spending of taxpayer dollars. Secondly, this review is really unnecessary and beyond the scope of the Planning Commission. I think this is the third time I've heard the presentation. This is wasted time for the public and staff. Thirdly, tonight I urge you to unanimously approve these projects. They've been carefully investigated and are prudently done. The city has a budget that exceeds $200 million. Of the capital improvement projects, there are three which directly improve the quality of life for residents. Number one, the Blackberry Farm Pro Shot. It's $120,000 or that's roughly two bucks a resident. Number two, Memorial Park sound attenuation, $150,000 or less than $3 per resident to solve a major issue for homeowners along Christensen Drive. Number three, sports center courts resurfacing. This is the most expensive project at $210,000 or less than $4 per resident. These three projects all cost Less than $10 per resident barely a rounding error in the city budget, yet each one of these has a significant sports community associated with it. it's time to stop squabbling get these projects approved and construction started, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Jean. Our next speaker is David Howe, followed by Hank, followed by Jennifer Gee. Welcome, David. Yes, we can hear you.

Yeah, so I'm just speaking also in support of the applicable sound attenuation. My wife and I moved right next to Memorial Park a few months ago, and we love the area. And one of the things we really love about it is the proximity to Memorial Park. And I myself play pickleball quite a bit. And I get that for the houses right across the street, it can make a lot of sound. And I just really want to make sure that everybody's happy in this situation. Our community still gets to play and do it in a way that's supportive of all the neighbors around the area, like I myself work like a regular nine to five, like most, I'm sure a lot of people do. The reason I'm not there in person right now is because I'm still at work, right? So like, if we can't put up a sound barrier in such a way that, you know, we can maybe play before nine or maybe slightly later into the evening, it really limits the opportunities that a lot of us can even utilize that utility. right so yeah that's that's basically all i have to say i just want to you know wholeheartedly support putting up the sound barrier thank you david our next speaker is hank followed by jennifer g followed by jeff ronnie welcome hank um hi just testing my mic to make sure it's active sorry

We can hear you.

OK, great. Good evening, chair and commissioners. My comment is on the Memorial Park Pickleball Sound Continuation CIP item. To be clear, this should not be reviewed as a routine noise control upgrade. The project narrative says a city would provide sound attenuation and memorial park and that the sound panels will require a new reinforced fence. The proposal funding $150,000. That means that this is not just an acoustic decision. It is a physical redesign of a public park facility and one unintentional effect of this decision is creating an additional issue that is tied to the line of sight. The written comment before you include vendor material showing 10 foot high acoustic barriers and case study examples of full perimeter enclosure of 48 panels and 192 linear feet. If anything that is being contemplated like this at Memorial Park, then the city is no longer reducing sound. It may be creating a wall-like visual barrier around public courts. That matters because a court sits along Christensen Drive and police, paramedic, park staff, neighbors, and passerby need to be able to see into the court area from the street, sidewalk, parking approach, and surrounding park circulation. If someone were to suffer from a medical distress or cardiac distress, heat stress, a fall, or another medical emergency, Responders should not have to physically enter a visually blocked enclosure before even knowing where the patient or the person that is distressed or to see what is happening. This is especially important because pickleball is heavily used by older adults. The city should not create a condition where elderly users are playing inside a visually screened court area and first responders cannot immediately assess medical emergencies from outside the fence. The same applies to police response. Transparent chain link fences preserve the line of sight. Sound acoustic panels do not. If an officer is responding to a disturbance, fight, after-hour use, vandalism, or some other call, an officer should be able to assess the court area before entering. A tall, opaque barrier forces blind approach to gates, corners, and enclosed areas. That is worse for police officers, worse for park users, and worse for the city's risk profile. Um, so the request here is to not recommend this as an open ended sound continuation project, unless the recommendation expressly requires the application of these, uh, principles that will allow 1st responders to attend to emergencies promptly and immediately. And that the city should require an analysis from Christians and drive the sidewalk, the parking approach, the park pathways. in likely first responder access points please do not let this cip item become a blank check for an opaque 10-foot enclosure around public courts noise mitigation is valid but cannot come at the expense to a line of sight emergency visibility natural surveillance and first responder safety thank you thank you hank our next speaker is jennifer g followed by jeff ron welcome jennifer

Can you all hear me? Yes, we can hear you. OK, yeah, I'm sorry, I apologize. My zoom blew up about two minutes ago. Came back in, put my hand up. OK, yeah, this is Jennifer Griffin and thank you for the very good report on the projects. It's very helpful. I'm going to talk for a minute about the 85 over crossing at Stevens Creek Blvd. We actually at 6 o'clock we just drove past that, went to the post office put in a letter, came back, and I was thinking about that over crossing. I'm really concerned, in fact, there was a child on an e-scooter that was going across the bridge toward the post office. I'm really concerned that the sidewalks on that 85 bridge are not very wide and there's they're very high and I don't really I feel like there's a lot of danger for bicyclists and people on e-vehicles and other I don't know strollers or something between the the traffic and those really narrow sidewalks I mean because that that bridge has been in there since what night I think that was 1990 that it went in so I hope that when we're having the discussion about upgrades to this very very important over crossing that we can kind of look at the whole thing and see how very very narrow The bridge is, I know it's impossible, but I think that bridge really should be expanded, make it wider for traffic. And I think that those sidewalks are too high and too narrow. I'm also concerned about the access from Westport when you come down the sidewalk and then you kind of dip down and then 85, I know you're gonna have improvements to the 85 on-ramp there going lord was that northbound but it's it's kind of difficult it's like a strange little sidewalk area it dips down and then you have this very very very old And I'm wondering if there's anything that can be done. Maybe you can get grant funding to try to make the bridge wider, at least into the sidewalks. It just looks very, very awkward. I've been staring at it for, what, 40, 30 years now, and it doesn't look like it's gotten any better. And also, can they improve, do beautification of it? I know that sounds strange, but it's a very prominent issue feature in the um west side of cupertino and it just looks really old i think that we need to put in some upgrades to it and if you could try to fix the vegetation in front of westport along stevens creek boulevard it there's just it looks awful like the weeds and things anyway thank you thank you jennifer our next speaker is jeff ronnie welcome jeff

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

Okay, yes. I strongly support the sound attenuation project. I play pickleball daily. I administer a group of 950 people that play pickleball at various times. Some of them play at 9 o'clock at night or 6 o'clock in the morning because they're economically productive and have jobs. And inclusion is a major part of Pickleball. The demographics are outstanding. Young people, old people, middle-aged people, grandfathers playing with grandkids. And inclusion is a social construct in community building. And To address the other person's concerns about safety, there could easily be gaps or portals in the noise barrier that would leave it 98% functional. They're not exclusive. It doesn't have to be 100% opaque. And many municipalities have taken this long-term solution as an answer. to address homeowners concerns as well as pickleball uh player access is public parks are a stellar resource in a place where houses cost millions of dollars is there 60 000 residents so uh there's enough funding it's just a question of will and intent in my opinion And I've started a petition and we want to support people that are supportive of pickleball because it's the fastest growing thing in the last five years globally. It's not a mistake. It's been around since 1967 and it's viable and growing and it's been that way for the last five years and it's no accident. So this is a very small item on the budget and it's a matter I'm encouraged that they've come up with an estimate of $150,000. Because I think there's many solutions and many municipalities have chosen this path. Do you have any comments about my comments? Okay, I think I'm done, thank you.

Thank you, Jeff. We have no remaining speakers in person and no hands raised on Zoom.

Thank you very much, City Clerk. I'll bring it back to the Commission for any further clarifying questions before we move to comments.

Thank you, Chair. I did have a question on the opaque screen or the opaque wall comment that was made to Director Moseley and Ms. Michael. Having been a tennis player for 41 years, I know that screens are actually appreciated by tennis players because it does give you an opaque background and actually having a see-through is actually a detriment to sighting the ball. And in fact, when the screens were replaced in the Sports Center, they were clean screens. One of the benefits of aged screens is that they get dirty. And as they get dirty, the players appreciate it because it is opaque. And so when we had clear screens, we actually were asking why did the quality of the screens change. It turned out it was the same screen, but it had become opaque. So opacity seems to be a virtue. I just wanted to point that out. On the opaque question, though, I do see that there are design options for clear screens. Should the staff choose to go with that option? Is that right?

We'll be looking at various types of screens. One of them does provide a clear option and we're looking into that one because of some of the concerns that were mentioned by one of the residents here about emergency access. So we want to make sure we want to look at that to see if it's a viable option.

And this sound attenuation does not replace the existing screens that are on the courts, correct? Because there are existing semi-opaque screens that are on the court, and those remain there. Is that right?

Where the new panels would go in, those screens would probably be removed. Oh, they would be removed. Okay.

Yeah, I would encourage... the staff to take a look at getting input from players on court, both from the tennis and the pickleball. If you remove the screens that exist and the opacity is reduced, at least for the tennis players, that can be a detriment to citing the ball. I play pickleball as well, and I've enjoyed pickleball there. The trajectory of the ball is a little lower with pickleball, and you're also shorter distances versus tennis. You have the longer distance and higher trajectory, so line of sight is a little less of an issue, but it's always good to get input from the players. I think a semi-opaque screen might be a win-win. If we can preserve the quality of opacity that we have right now, that would be a reasonable compromise, I would think. Very good. We'll look into that.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other clarifying questions?

Okay, I did have some more if no one else...

And I did submit one particular vendor that did have this offering, and I added that in written comments, and I reached out to the director mostly about that as well. It appears that at least for the length of the two courts, which is basically the pickleball court right now and the northern panel, from what I understand, that vendor says the cost is about $11 per square foot. And the rough math on that fence is about 1,440 square feet, if we think it's about a 12-foot fence, 12 to 15-foot fence, and about uh 100 to 120 feet across two tennis courts uh that's about 15 000 so i'm wondering and i don't know if at any will prevent this question because we're not allowed to talk about cost but i'm curious about the 10x order of magnitude between the vendor thinking it's a 15k project because if it's a 15k project this is a no-brainer we should just go ahead and do it so just curious about

I can talk to that a little bit. I was looking at a slightly longer bit of fence, about 260 linear feet, 12 foot high. So at the price that they were providing, it's probably closer to $35,000. And that's just to purchase it. That doesn't include delivery, installation, anything else. We also have the existing fence that needs a structural upgrade. So we'll have an engineer have to provide those calcs and then We'll have to do those improvements, and additionally, I've thrown an acoustic analysis on there to make sure before we spend any more than the acoustic analysis that this is going to work before we go spend money on it.

Yeah, I would just say the vendor I spoke to indicated that no fence structural changes were needed, and this was an easy self-install kind of job where they basically got the uh the whatever those strings are to just put it up and so i would encourage us to if nothing else if this is a 15k spend on something that does not require a fence structural job whereas the other job is a structural that takes 12 months out to do a structural study and a noise study and everything else let's just look at the the time value of money as well if we can get a project in at 15k let's not let perfect be the enemy of good and you know heck maybe we can get the screen in a week or two And we wouldn't be talking about this.

If you've looked at the existing fabric out there, you'll notice there's holes cut out in the top, and that was because that fabric was providing too much wind load to the fence. So a heavier, fully solid acoustic panel would really cause problems to the fence. So we know it's not structurally sound.

Yeah, I appreciate that point of view, because I know the construction screens do cause fences to topple, and those fences can be quite a bit shorter. And I haven't seen the fence topple at the Sports Center as well in a recent storm, I think a year ago. So thank you.

Commissioner Linskog?

Hi. Yeah, so on the pickleball thing, I mean, I do think it's a good idea to try and find a solution that works for both pickleball players and the residents. I mean, we do want to be a welcoming city, both for our residents as well as for pickleball players. So I strongly support any kind of solutions we can come up with, like the attenuation thing. I mean, it sounds like Director Mosley has a pretty logical, structured approach to it, and I would encourage us to let him follow that. I do think it's important to do the measurements of the noise impact whenever we try a solution to make sure that it's actually helping, because speed is important. I don't disagree. But if we put something up that's not very expensive and we're just focused on speed, it may not be the best solution for the long term. And at the end of the day, I think the residents deserve a solution that actually works and actually attenuates the sound to a level that makes it a pleasant environment for them. So those are my comments. Thanks. Commissioner Rao.

Thank you, Chair. I did also speak to the vendor about how well accepted that solution has been. And it appears that at least the vendor being in Florida, they've had wide acceptance in Florida with no negative concerns on that. I know they also submitted a noise study, and they seem to stand by the decibel reductions on their different versions. So in general, it just seems like let's look at our options, and if you have something that's seamless and in-place upgradable without offense structural upgrade, you know, if that's something that we can consider. And maybe even we can talk to the public works peers that these vendors have, because they are working with other parks and rec and other public works city departments that are all working with city parks and city facilities. So if we can, in fact, use this opportunity to network with our peer colleagues in those cities, let's ask those questions of them, whether they've had to do those structural improvements, because I know we are in a fiscal crisis. We'd like to save all the dollars we can, but we'd also like the pickleball community and the neighborhood to get some sound relief so that we can get back to 9 o'clock. I know when I used to play, it was always in the evening, and I couldn't get out in the morning as a working person, but I appreciated the 9 p.m. time and would love to see the 9 p.m. come back. Thank you.

Vice Chair?

So I wonder if Public Works, are you looking at different... You know, doing the research on this, I see a couple of different transparent solutions. One's called Pickle Glass, which is actually glass, and one is Clear Play, I think, which is some kind of plastic. Have you looked at, and I'm just worried that the plastic is just gonna discolor very quickly, where the glass, even if it's more expensive initially, it might be a good investment if it doesn't need to be replaced as often. I mean, this is not a huge amount of money here.

Yeah, and I can give a little bit of background on that. I don't know what the long term Quality of the hush tech is I'm trying to find that out with respect to the pickle glass that turns this project up into something close to $700,000 Wow, so I okay kind of look the other way on that one and look for other options I was trying to find one that's both cost-effective and does provide that that clear view And I'm trying to get more information on this I mean it is a good time to replace the fence because it is true that

When you put in that kind of panel, it's a tremendous wind load on the fence that would probably destroy it in quick order. Thank you.

Commissioner Linscott has her hand raised.

Yes, thank you. I did have a quick question about the comment that was made by one of the residents that this might be a law enforcement or first responder concern. Have we spoken to anyone in law enforcement or first responders to see if they have any concerns around this? And are they going to be part of the process of evaluating the right type of noise attenuating solution that we decide to move forward with?

I have not spoken with the Sheriff's Office yet, but we will include them before we make any final decisions.

Thank you. Commissioner Rao?

Yes. Director, mostly I know we get a lot of, at least I hear from the Commons neighborhood as well, the Commons property by the by the sports center and there on the southern side of where the memorial park facility is is there anything that could be done to improve noise on the southern side as well because i know when i'm walking memorial park on that pathway by the parking lot the pickleball sound is audible and that's right by where commons is so since we are going after this project is there any way we can help the commons restaurants as well

We can look into that. I don't think that the noise levels for the commons are triggering outside of the noise ordinance, but we'll look into that a little further. I'll ask our acoustic professional to give us their thoughts on that.

Yeah, I'd love to have you join me on a walk there, and we can go check the noise out in the evenings. And I'd say the noise is certainly audible. So if it's a 15,000 to 20,000 project, or even a 30,000 project, if you're coming in under budget, let's keep the comments in mind and see if we can help the noise situation there. And for all we know, if we improve the noise, maybe this hours of play can actually be resumed to what it used to be. Thank you.

I had one clarifying question from the public comment. Was there a new golf course renovated bathroom and did that come through on a prior facilities improvement CIP item?

We did provide the restroom at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course, let's call it a facelift, last year through our maintenance operations. We replaced the partitions and epoxied the floors, gave it a paint job. Relatively minor, but just trying to freshen it up because it was getting old.

Okay, thank you.

Question for the chair. If we are running out of time, is there a process to borrow time from Commissioner Fung, who is not present? This is 15 minutes. Can we divvy up this 15 minutes among the four of us over here?

I think let's see where we end up, and if I feel that we need to add time, I will add time. It depends on the conversation.

Wonderful. I'd hate not to justice to the pickleball community who are sitting here patiently because I ran out of time here for them. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. From my end, I'm ready to move into comments if anyone has any other clarifying questions. Commissioner Rao?

Yes, I did have more clarifying questions. So looking beyond pickleball here, is there full-cost recovery expected on the BlackBerry Farm golf course? And is that its own enterprise fund?

I'm not sure if there's going to be full-cost recovery on BlackBerry Farm. That current program... Operates where it's at. This is just enhancing the existing Pro shop basically up just giving an update. It's also very old Appreciate that.

I understand parks and rec is not here. I know with the Sports Center We are at 54 percent cost recovery, but if you throw in the capital improvements that drops to 30 percent So I'd hazard maybe we have some of their abouts with golf course pro shop perhaps or even lower Is there any way to apply for grants for any of these projects? I know sports is there's us us a pickleball Association as USDA and other organizations we could try to get grants for Either of these projects that are not grant supported right now I'm unaware of any grants But we do have a grant management analysts and I will request that she take a look at that and see if there is anything out there.

I

And I'd encourage our active pickleball community to also explore that option. I know I looked at USDA for grants for court lights, and that was actually something that USDA did provide grants for. So it's certainly something that the sports community of Cupertino perhaps might help bring forth options for grants in these areas, if not for this project, maybe for the next one. Thank you.

Any other clarifying questions? Vice Chair?

Was there any consideration to requiring or encouraging quieter pickleball equipment, quiet paddles and all?

kind of getting out of my area of expertise, but I know there was some encouragement in the past to attempt to use quiet pickleball equipment during hours, later hours in the evening and earlier hours in the morning. There is currently a concept of initiating a pilot further in July, depending on what happens with this project.

My understanding was that there is a request for a quiet equipment right now, correct?

Correct.

Great, thank you. Commissioner Rao?

Yes, just a point of clarification. I don't know that the quiet paddle is the scope of our agenda discussion tonight, but I will say that I played with quiet paddles with one of the members of the club and really enjoyed it. I thought the quiet paddle actually felt really satisfying to play with, and I have a quiet owl paddle myself, so I appreciate that.

Thank you. Any other clarifying questions? Then we'll move into comments. Any comments from the commission? And just to clarify, city attorney, we do not need to make any motions tonight. That's correct. Thank you. Commissioner Rao?

THANK YOU, CHAIR. I EXPRESS MY WHOLEHEARTED SUPPORT FOR THE PICKLE BALL PROJECT, ESPECIALLY IF WE CAN LOOK AT THIS OPTION THAT REDUCES COST DOWN TO 15 TO 20K WITH NO STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS. LET'S LOOK AT CAN WE GET THIS IN A FEW WEEKS, NOT A FEW MONTHS, AND LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THE HOURS OF PLAYBACK. I also express my full support for the court resurfacing at the Sports Center, and FYI, De Anza College is resurfacing as we speak right now, and FHDA is putting that billion-dollar fund to good use for sports improvements and infrastructure improvements. And let's do the same. Cupertino is the home of America's newest Australian Open junior, and so I hope we will support both tennis and pickleball. We can do both. Thank you.

Any other comments? All right. So I have a few comments. So first of all, I want to acknowledge the difficulty of this problem that we're trying to solve around pickleball noise. I was looking in the American Planning Association recently put out an article about tiered zoning systems. So courts over 800 feet away from residents are in the clear. They don't need mitigation anywhere like 350 to 700 feet. can require mitigation and anything less than 250 feet is actually considered too close for pickleball courts. So these houses are actually within 70, 80 feet. And so I think we have a challenge because my concern would be that even with a wall, we are not going to fully mitigate the noise to the satisfaction of the surrounding residents. And that said, we have to do what we can. But there are examples of other cities, Boise, Idaho, San Clemente, California, where acoustic sound barriers were implemented and residents still found the noise to be intolerable. So my ask would just be that when this pilot happens, that we notice all of the surrounding neighbors and actually invite them to provide feedback on the pilot and whether or not it's working. Because at the end of the day, if they're not happy with it, we're gonna hear from them anyway. And that's the whole point of this. And then secondly, I think it'd be great as if we as a city could learn from our neighbors about their experiences with sound walls. So I did find that the city of Los Gatos and city of Saratoga, other cities that are actually smaller than us, have moved forward with sound attenuation for the exact same reason of complaints from residents. And they were able to, through the competitive bidding process, find sound attenuation that includes all four walls. Now, I want to acknowledge the points that the other commissioners have made. I think there's benefits and drawbacks to sound attenuation at different price points, and when you pay less, you may get a lower level of attenuation. noise mitigation, so I think that's the tough thing that needs to be weighed here. So if anything, my only ask on that front would be that we make sure that we are keeping the STC ratings into account when we select the materials, because I don't think that they are equivalent based on the vendor and the pricing, and so I just want to make sure we don't LEAVE THAT OUT. OTHER FEEDBACK ON THE REST OF THE PLAN, THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN DOES SEEM TO INDEX A LITTLE BIT MORE TOWARDS THE SPORTS CENTER AND BLACKBERRY FARM, SO IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE UPGRADES ARE SPREAD ACROSS OTHER PARKS AND FACILITIES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. IT'S ALSO REALLY GOOD TO SEE THE CITY HALL ANNEX EOC ON THIS LIST. HAVING DONE CERT TRAINING AND BEEN INSIDE OUR CITY'S EOC, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE AN AREA THAT WE CAN FUNCTION AS OUR CITY'S COMMAND CENTER AND You know, it's not quite there at the moment, so I do think that's an important one. So that is my feedback for now. Any other commissioners? Yeah, Commissioner Rowe.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to add the Sports Center project is at least 10 to 12 years, I believe, or more since it has been done. And I know it is a revenue generating facility, generates about 1.3 million in revenue, has over 2,000 members. Over 60% Cupertino residents, so we want to improve all of our parks, and let's find the grants to go do that and appreciate everything that Public Works does. Every investment in infrastructure is table stakes for our city. We do not want our city to degrade like some of the other cities out there, and I want to thank Public Works. I see them working on weekends as well, and I just want to call out all Public Works staff that have been working the city on weekends. Thank you.

Vice Chair?

So one resident was talking about the sidewalks on the 85 overpass. And I was looking on Google Maps. And yeah, indeed, they are quite narrow. And I'm wondering, I know like on De Anza, they narrowed the lanes by a certain number of inches in order to put in the bike path, I believe. I just wonder, is that possible, these lanes, you know, to take six inches off of each lane and make the sidewalks wider when they redo the overpass? Or is that an unreasonable thing or what?

So you can do anything. so for this one we would have to go to caltrans have a full structural evaluation done because as soon as you're adding additional weight to that structure um they would get involved and so to widen that sidewalk you'd have to extend the curb out so now we're adding concrete okay i see like i said and it's not that it can't be done it would just it would be a long expensive process so there's no structural

Changes being made in the current plan. Is that what you're correct?

There's nothing to that There's nothing being proposed for the bridge. It's all outside of the bridge deck limits.

Okay.

Thank you Personally I would be reluctant to propose narrowing of major freeway on-ramp, you know, especially just for evacuation safety purposes It's not the on-ramp, but anyway, okay All right, Commissioner Linskog

Thank you. Yeah, so I think I agree with the chair. I think, I mean, I understand the pickleball players is... interested in getting the extended hours back again as quickly as possible. I sympathize with that and I totally think we should try and do that as quickly as possible, but I do think we need to balance that with the needs of the residents who live there and take our time and hopefully do this quickly, but evaluate all of the possible options and figure out which one provides the best noise attenuation at a reasonable cost. So I would ask you guys to be a little bit patient on that so we can get to a solution that works for everyone and that makes everyone happy. So I think, yeah, I think that's an important thing. And then, of course, we talked about also getting law enforcement and first responder input. So there's a lot of constituents that we need to consider. We just need to be a little bit thoughtful about it. Everything else on the CIP looks good. I want to thank the CIP staff and Susan and the public work staff for all you guys' hard work and the saving of the $1 million. That's fantastic. So congratulations on that. And I know you guys put a lot of thought into all of these projects. So thank you for your hard work.

Thank you, Commissioner Rao.

Thank you, Chair. Running out of time here. Director Mosley, I know the Sports Center Pro Shop is outsourced to Lifetime, and I know in previous RFP bids, part of the vendors' comeback on these RFPs have been to offer some sweeteners on the RFPs. Is there any way that we could put this Pro Shop at the golf course to bid and let Lifetime or someone else come back with a response that offers to do some tenant improvements on the Pro Shop so that the city doesn't have to pay for this?

I mean, we're kind of outside of my area of expertise. I don't know that Lifetime operates anything down at Blackberry Farm, so I can't talk to that specifically, but I can talk with Director Sanders and have her provide me her thoughts on it.

If you may capture that in the notes, I don't know how we're doing minutes here. If you're not doing motions, I don't think the minutes will capture the feedback. But if you may capture my feedback to consider the model where the pro shop is outsourced to a vendor. I know the Sunnyvale Las Palmas Pro Shop is also run by Lifetime. The Santa Clara Tennis Center, which is also a city facility pro shop, is run by Lifetime. So if the golf course pro shop can be run by a vendor, whether it's Lifetime or whoever else, let's find a way to do a public-private partnership where the Well, maybe that's not the right term but let's find a way to see if the improvements can be Fully or partly funded by a vendor if you put this out to bid.

Thank you Commissioner Rao if you need more time I can yield five minutes to you Thank You chair. I have no more comments at this time Do we have any further comments from Commission? Great. Thank you very much. Then is there any interest in any commissioner for a motion? We don't need to have a motion, but we can.

I move to approve all proposed projects by Public Works. Special recommendation to look at expediting the pickleball sound attenuation. Thank you. Do I have a second?

I'll second that.

Thank you, Chair.

Do we have any discussion on this motion?

I thought we, you know, we can support this, but is approve the right word? We're not really approving anything. Endorse. Okay, endorse. Okay. How about that? Yeah.

That would be my substitute motion to say we endorse it instead of... Well, I can just amend my motion to say we endorse staff recommendation on the 26-27 CIP funding. With special recommendation to expedite pickleball if possible.

Commissioner, let's go. I have a quick question. What does expedite mean here in this case?

I will leave that to the discretion of our staff.

Well, I mean, you're making the motion.

So what do you mean when you say that expedite means exactly what it means? If you would like to pull up a dictionary, happy to do that.

So I have a concern with expediting if it means that we don't explore all of the options that will create the best solution for the residents in the area. So that's why I want to understand what you mean by that.

I believe we have a motion and a second, so happy to deliberate on it. But my motion is that if staff can save the neighborhood and the community that loves the game and give them a win sooner with reference checks from proven case studies that these vendors are bringing forth to us, as is in the written comments that I encourage my fellow commissioners to read, then it would be great to expedite using those added checks and balances. Once again, we are not taking shortcuts. We are not saying go for the cheapest option. We're saying this has been done widely. There are case studies. They're standing behind the decibel reduction. There's a four to six decibel reduction. So let's go look at that if we can make it happen. Thank you.

Commissioner Linscott? Yeah, so, um, I don't think it's a prudent use of city, uh, money to just go for 1 vendor without doing a proper vetting of all the possible solutions out there. Um, so if I can propose an amended motion that we. We can expedite as long as we still do the work of exploring multiple options and doing the noise measurements to make sure that it is the best possible solution.

um then uh yeah i'll propose that amendment through the chair the motion does not propose a single vendor no-bid situation i just want to clarify under no conditions yeah i'm still amending as the proposal has has the proposer suggested a single vendor solution but The motion simply says if there are options to expedite to encourage staff to do that and to give them discretion and allow them the judgment to do that. Thank you.

And that's fine. And I'm proposing an amended motion that says to ensure that we look at multiple options to find the right, the one that is the best possible solution.

Excuse me, Commissioner Linska. I think you're proposing a substitute motion. Is it a substitute motion or amendment it's either a substitute motion or a friendly amendment to the original motion Thank you at any boo.

I do not see the need to amend since the motion does not propose not having multiple vendors So the motion provides staff the discretion to do the right thing in their judgment So the mover rejects your request to amend the motion Commissioner Lin Scott.

Well just to clarify Then how how do we expedite? without In my mind, part of the amount of time spent is looking at more options. So how do you expedite it without looking at as many options?

It is a motion to encourage staff to consider expeditious solutions as a criteria in their judgment, in their professional judgment. And I would leave it to the able judgment of Director Mosley. Thank you.

Okay, then I propose a substitute motion where we can expedite the pickleball courts as long as we explore all possible options and look at the noise impact of each option and pick the best possible one with the cost impact ratio in mind. Do I have a second?

So I'm not clear that there is a second from this.

Chair, I'm not hearing a second.

Yes. Okay. Okay, so with that, I am curious actually if you would be willing to entertain a minor amendment in addition to your motion that all neighboring residents be notified of the pilot and be asked for feedback.

So accepted.

Okay. Thank you.

Does the seconder accept? Seems like this is a noticing that may already be done by staff. Is noticing required for any of these projects?

I think for this project, there would be noticing.

Okay.

Vice Chair, do you accept the amendment?

I didn't. Can I be the second?

Oh, you know what? That was me.

I'm sorry. I guess I accept my own amendment. Apologies. Okay, then, City Clerk, I think we're ready for a vote.

Commissioner Rao?

Yes.

Commissioner Linskog? Aye. Vice Chair Scharf?

Aye.

Chair Casalshran?

Aye.

The motion carries unanimously with Commissioner Fung absent.

Thank you very much. So we'll now move on to staff and commission reports. Do we have any staff and commission reports?

We do not have any staff reports at this time, Chair.

Thank you. Do we have any items for future agenda setting? Commissioner Rouse.

Sorry, Chair. Did we want to solicit commissioner reports?

I did. I asked as a collective, do we have any staff and commission reports? Do you have a staff or a commissioner report? I'm sorry.

Yeah, I was going to ask if we would get maybe this leads into future agenda, but the commissioner report I would want to offer up is I'm getting a lot of concern from residents around the evacuation study and what actions the city will take on fire evacuation given the concerns around four hours to evacuate some of our high traffic corridors and more projects being proposed in that area so just wanna share the commissioner report from president import that fire evacuation remains top of mind for our residents thank you

thank you for that feedback any other commission reports do we have any items for future agenda setting through the chair i'd like to

Once again, encourage us to bring back no net loss as a subcommittee so that commissioners may contribute to this agenda, because what I'm hearing is the no net loss actually needs to meet the BMR number at the shortfall, and the shortfall may be 300 or above. So we're talking 300 BMR units, and if we assume 10% are BMR units, then we could be talking approving 3,000 units in Cupertino. And our original housing element was 4,600 units. So I just want to encourage us to not just wait on a consultant who doesn't live here, doesn't walk our neighborhoods, doesn't speak to our residents, doesn't know what it means to put 3,000 units in our midst, and instead to encourage us to take up a subcommittee so that those of us who live here and talk to our residents can actually do a proposal from our side on where we think 3,000 units can go. can actually go because we are not talking 300 units. We may be talking 3,000 total units of which 10% will meet the no net loss rule. Thank you.

Thank you. And with that, the meeting is adjourned.